University Faculty Meeting – April 21, 2009 – Page 5
University of Idaho
Regular Meeting of the Faculty
Minutes
2008-09 Meeting #3 Tuesday April 21, 2009.
A quorum being present (121), President Daley-Laursen called the meeting to order at 3:32 p.m.
Minutes: The minutes of the previous meeting (#2, 2008-09, November 17, 2008) were approved unanimously (Miller, Adams).
The President thanked faculty for coming to the meeting on a beautiful spring day and noted that he greatly valued their role in shared governance.
The President announced upcoming commencement ceremonies:
· Boise, Wednesday May 6th. The commencement address will be given by Jeffrey Musou, President of Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment projects and an affiliate of Bechtel.
· Coeur d’Alene, Monday May 11th. The commencement address will be given by Senator John Geddy.
· Moscow ceremony will be held on Saturday May 16th. The commencement address will be given by Congressman Walter Minich, followed by the College of Law ceremony, the address being given by Randy Smith of the US Court of Appeals 9th circuit.
In Memoriam: The president called for a few moments of silence to honor those who had passed away.
Merrill W. Conitz
Associate Professor of Civil Engineering
— March 2009 —
James R. Davis
Research Professor Emeritus of Plant Pathology
— March 2009 —
Floyd H. Peterson, Jr.
Professor of Music and Director Emeritus
— April 2009 —
Richard H. Ross
Professor of Animal Science and Extension Dairy Specialist Emeritus
— March 2009 —
Rosa L. Smith
Extension Professor Emerita
— January 2009 —
______
The President noted that we are living in a historically complex and challenging time. He spoke to the readiness of the university to deal with the current difficult, national fiscal situation because of early planning that had begun three years prior with the objective of shaping and transforming the university. There were three framing points: 1. Why we are working through this shaping and transformation exercise. 2. A quick review of the strategic processes for achieving that transformation and, 3. Most importantly, encouragement of faculty leadership in shared governance to continue this process and for performing essential work for the entire UI community.
He noted that we are engaged together in writing the next and distinctly different chapter in the evolution of the university. This process was set in motion in 2006; launched on the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) that began to take shape in our minds of what we might look like into the future. In 2007 and 2008 the SAP implementation phase began. Greater ownership of the plan was and will continue to be taken up through tying the planning exercise to resource allocation decisions. The President reiterated that we must stay the course and add further definition. He noted that Provost Baker was dedicated to making this plan work to focus the university for a vital and successful future.
He further noted that we have worked through several months of strategic planning activities and we are becoming an institution that had freed up resources that were previously invested in fiscally non-viable, duplicated or less popular programs. Resources are being redirected to programs of strength that are a better focus on our mission and sustaining in quality. We are moving to a position that will allow us to generate more resources and if we are vibrant we will make the best choices and others will join us by choosing us too. We will continue critical work to serve the motto of the state “esto perpetua” (meaning "May it endure forever"), and provide for Idaho a legacy of leading.
The President noted that there was abundant evidence that because we started our strategic planning process before most others, we have now begun to enjoy some distinction relative to our peers. The PPP has begun to allow us to invest in where we want to go. More than 30 programs were identified for elimination or consolidation. This process along with process re-engineering in the summer will allow us to improve efficiency to customers. Pilots are underway and will continue under the leadership of the Research Office. The President thanked Professor Michael O’Rourke for his work leading the RFI review committee, and noted that decisions would soon be forthcoming from the leadership. He noted that the regents had approved the proposed changes to the structure of finance planning and budget control functions. This was another vital step in tying resource allocations to planning. Finally, he noted that the major investment in advancement infrastructure has provided real gains in needs-based scholarship programs.
In closing the President thanked the faculty leadership team of Professors Karen Guilfoyle, Chair of Faculty Council, Rod Hill, Secretary of the Faculty and Jack Miller, Vice-Chair of Faculty Council for their efforts in working with the administration and championing shared governance. He also noted that last week, Professor Hill had been honored by the students, receiving the Outstanding Faculty Award. He also noted that more than a dozen faculty and staff were recently honored by their peers at the Annual Excellence Award Banquet.
The President noted our great collective advantage in that we would not be fractured by uncertainty and that our faculty continues to aspire to excellence, to lead every day as one of the leading research universities in the nation and one that provides the very best value in higher education. He noted that the faculty can carry the flag and that full faculty commitment would be needed to build our future. He again thanked the faculty for coming and for their efforts in everything they do to move the institution into a very bright and evolving future.
FC-09-005 – FSH 1520: University Constitution. Article V. Faculty Council. Off-campus Faculty Council Representation and Rename Faculty Council to Faculty Senate: Faculty Council Chair, Professor Guilfoyle invited FC Vice-Chair, Professor Miller to address the meeting. These proposed constitutional changes require a 2/3 majority support to proceed. The Vice-Chair provided a brief rationale for the proposed changes. Off-campus representation has actively participated in Faculty Council meetings interactively through compressed video for the past year and a half, but without the benefit of a vote. The amendment is to allow these three individuals across the state the ability to vote. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved, two against.
With regard to the name change to Faculty Senate it is to make clear the role of our faculty leadership body and its role of faculty governance as stated in the constitution, both internally and externally where the name, “Faculty Senate” is more widely accepted. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved, two against.
FC-09-071 - FSH 1520 – University Constitution. Article III. Faculty Meetings. The Secretary of the Faculty, Professor Hill outlined the rationale for changing faculty meetings to a multi-campus format, including all faculty with vote. This proposed constitutional change continues in the spirit of inclusion of all faculty in activities of the university. Currently to vote, faculty must be present at the GFM at the Moscow campus site. Furthermore, presently only Moscow campus-based faculty are counted in the quorum. Thus, these changes will facilitate multiple site General Faculty Meetings and include all faculty (attending at recognized venues) in participation and voting. In order to facilitate orderly multi-campus meetings via two-way electronic links, it is necessary to develop a mechanism to authorize a designated site and also to have a delegate at each site to coordinate tallying of votes and other procedural issues. The proposed changes in the constitution were designed to be generic. Thus, there is no reference to a particular site, to allow flexibility in site designation over time without the need to revisit constitutional change. On the issue of recalculation of a quorum, presently a quorum consists of 1/6 of the faculty based at the Moscow campus. The proposed change is to 1/8 of the entire faculty. Thus, based upon the numbers presently available, the number of faculty based at Moscow is 589 and 1/6 equals 98. This would change to 1/8 of the total faculty (782) which equals 98. Thus, there would be no change in the representative number required for a quorum, but we would now include all faculty from across the state. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved unanimously.
FSH 1540 A-1 – Standing Rules of the University Faculty – venue determination. Supplemental article to Article III. Venues for sites remote from Moscow for GFMs will be approved annually at the first meeting of FC each fall. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved unanimously.
FSH 1640.94 – University Multi-Campus Communications Committee. Supplemental article to Article III. In order to tally votes at each site the proposal is to elect delegates at each site. The members would be nominated to form the University Multi-campus Communications Committee (appointed by Committee on Committees). The UMCC would also make recommendations to FC to keep procedures and technology up-to-date and would provide feedback from faculty on satisfaction with communications during GFMs. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved unanimously.
Affirmative Action & Disability Affairs (Gender Identity/Expression)
FC-09-022: FSH 3200 – Policy of Nondiscrimination
FC-09-023: FSH 3860 – Grievance for Classified Staff
FC-09-024: FSH 3215 – Non Discrimination Sexual Orientation
FC-09-025: FSH 3060 – Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity
There being no discussion, all Affirmative Action and Disability Affairs changes were approved.
Faculty Affairs (tie AE to PD, connect to Strategic Action Plan goals, address interdisciplinary activities, establish common procedures). The Chair of Faculty Affairs Committee, Professor Crowley briefly reviewed the proposed changes. He noted that in general the committee sought not to engage in major policy shifts but rather to clarify, reorganize and remove duplication in the language.
FC-09-067: FSH 3050 – Position Description. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved, 2 opposed.
FC-09-068: FSH 3140 – Performance Expectations. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved, 2 opposed.
FC-09-069: FSH 3320 – Annual Evaluation. Within FSH 3320 Section A1b, there are five instances that state “…. including full consideration of the unit’s priorities.” It was noted that inclusion of this wording suggests that innovative scholarship by any faculty would be penalized in performance evaluations. It also signals a chilling effect on academic freedom. It was moved (Machlis/Davis) that the changes to FSH 3320 be accepted with the deletion of the five instances that state “…including full consideration of the unit’s priorities.” Approved.
FC-09-070:FSH 3420 – Faculty Salaries. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved, 3 opposed.
Other policy changes.
FC-09-074: FSH 3360 – Probation, Promotion, Demotion & Transfer of Classified Employees. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved, majority.
FC-09-075: FSH 4130 – Standard Course Numbers. There being no discussion the question was called. Approved, majority.
Proposed changes to the University of Idaho Catalog. It was moved (Hill/Machleidt) to approve the remaining items as a group.
For clarification, it was noted that approval of these items would approve the FC vote. That is where FC had disapproved an item, the present vote would also endorse the disapproval and where FC had approved an item, approval of the vote would endorse the FC approval. It was noted that there were three program closures that were disapproved by FC. That is, FC voted to retain those programs: FC-09-033 MS Geological Engineering, FC-09-066 – MAT Art Education, FC-09-073 MS in Architecture. It was noted that some faculty may chose to disagree with the FC vote to retain those programs. A friendly amendment to the motion was proposed to deal with all remaining items with the exclusion of FC-09-033, 066 and 073 (Crowley/Miller). The friendly amendment was accepted, and the question was called. Approved, 1 opposed.
FC-09-033 moved as approved by FC (Crowley / Wilson). Approved, 2 against.
FC-09-066 moved as approved by FC (Crowley / Wilson). Approved, 3 against.
FC-09-073 moved as approved by FC (Crowley / Miller). Approved, 2 against.
A point of order was raised that the meeting understood that the above approval was only for the NOIs and that in addition other items should be approved or denied separately. This contention was not opposed and the remaining items were brought before the meeting.
There was no further discussion on any of the remaining items (FC-09-028, FC-09-053 through FC-09-065, and FC-09-072). Approved.
FC-09-026: Final Exam Schedules. Approved.
FC-09-027: UCC-09-016 - Certificate of Nuclear Criticality Safety. Approved.
FC-09-031: UCC-09-065 – Regulation M-3-b. Approved unanimously.
FC-09-076: UCC-09-062 - Registration B and C. Approved, 4 against.
The President thanked all for attending.
Adjournment: It was moved to adjourn at 4:55 p.m. (Miller/Hoversten), approved unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Rodney A. Hill
Secretary of the Faculty.